Capitalism's Unequal Equilibrium

We have mistakenly given the term ‘equilibrium’ a positive connotation, which has produced those on the political right with a false sense of superiority about unfettered capitalism.


The equilibrium of a system is defined by the forces within that system, which push it toward its equilibrium point. (If that point is a moving target, it may never actually be reached—like a railroad car never catching the engine.) If the system's forces are aligned in such a way that a positive outcome is not its equilibrium point, then the system is flawed. But we never even look at that question because too many people think that the push for ‘equilibrium’ is valid on its own, not even bothering to look at, let alone evaluate, its destination.

The equilibrium of capitalism is one of unequal access and outcomes—some will be rich and powerful, others (the vast majority) will not; some will have access to resources, some (the vast majority) will not. This should not be considered a positive goal for any society.
 
Pure capitalism does have an equilibrium, but it's negative and it’s required by its structure.